If the embedded graphical information is correct, it means that FactCheck is lying about doing the photo session "recently" and may be lying about much more, since it would be implausible that "FactCheck" was even checking facts about the birth certificate in March 2008.Why indeed? The Obama campaign wanted the right wing blogosphere to run with this story. They were laying the groundwork back in March, even before the controversy had errupted.
Why, then, did it take the campaign ten weeks to produce photos that show the missing seal, signature block and deep fold marks, so deep that they disrupt some letters and print of the seal? What changed between June 12 and August 21?So the conservative blogosphere would stay busy for awhile.
Then there is the issue of the redacted file number which for the last ten plus weeks has been blacked out .To add more support for the conspiracy theorists.
That's odd. The "rush" to release the document? Who exactly was rushing them?There was no rush. They wanted to post the redacted image.
Despite the points scored by the Obama campaign in gaining high level media coverage for a favorable puff piece ...By design and laying the groundwork to continually discredit the conservative blogosphere when they make charges in the future.
That question, it now seems, will need to be answered in federal court.Where they already know they will definitively prevail. They wanted a controversy that they could clearly end when the time came. Note that it is a Democrat who filed this suit. One who would absolutely love being included in a real conspiracy. They want to end this summer tempest before people really start paying attention to the campaign this fall.
One additional piece. Why did Bill Clinton make his little offhand remark about Obama being "Constitutionally eligible"? Cleverly phrased to add fuel to the controversy without actually making a charge. He's always been clever with words.
Why did TexasDarlin close up shop right before one of the biggest events that could support the PUMA "cause"? Hillary taking the nomination at the last minute would be a historic event. Assuming she is working to make it happen she would want to give the blow by blow account about how her efforts make it happen. Lot's of bloggers will be blogging from the convention. Most hotels have wireless internet these days. It's not like it would be a difficult task.
As I have posted before, most if not all charges supporting legal ineligibility, even if true, are not supported by US law or the Constitution.
It's a theory and ought to give pause to those who want to make a difference in this election. Those that think the Democrats are that dumb do so at their peril. If it's too good to be true it probably is.
The only "conspiracy" I see in this is the one between The Hawaiian Department of State and Obama. Why? The statements about the certificate number. There was no reason for it to be blacked out, yet Janice Okubo said "The thing that's redacted is just our file number. Potentially, if you have that number, you could break into the system."
If she did not know why they blacked it out she could have said so. Instead she covered for it. She also said about the original posting of a certificate image on KOS/FTS that (assuming that is what the The St Petersburg Times Polifact website sent her) "It's a valid Hawaii state birth certificate." Which itself is a strange wording, in context. She could have said, "Yes, that's the certificate we issued," and she could have strengthened her statement by saying -- "And the information on the image is accurate according to what records we have."
These loose statements might be chalked up to incompetence, but when she made up the excuse for the blacked out certificate number, that suggests a possible conspiracy to defraud the public.
Has anyone in authority over heard of this “Jay McKinnon, a self-described Department of Homeland Security-trained document specialist.”
Yes, the EXIF data showing the photos actually taken last March, together with implied claim of recency, pretty much proves FactCheck is in bed with the Obama campaign. Oh, they'll say the camera clock was set wrong. But in truth, they are having a good chuckle at our expense.
Why did TexasDarlin close up shop right before one of the biggest events that could support the PUMA "cause"? Hillary taking the nomination at the last minute would be a historic event. Assuming she is working to make it happen she would want to give the blow by blow account about how her efforts make it happen. Lot's of bloggers will be blogging from the convention. Most hotels have wireless internet these days. It's not like it would be a difficult task.
I'd buy her excuse of not having the time to baby sit her blog right now. In any case, I don't think Hillary will steal the nomination. She's smart enough to know that, at this point, the fallout from such a move would be so severe as to guarantee defeat in November. No, she, Bill, and Chelsea are going to enjoy their moment in the sun and issue their pro forma call for party unity. They'll support Obama 1000% up through the election. They'll breath a silent sigh of relief when he crashes and burns (for reasons having nothing to do with birth certificates). Then it will be time to get ready for 2012.
Thanks for including me in your thoughts.
Since I haven’t heavily involved myself in the issue I can only approach this from what I would call a common sense point of view.
I believe that your views are more in line with reality than the witch hunt that is trying to prove Obama isn’t constitutionally eligible.
At this point the only thing that would derail Obama is by someone coming out inside the Hawaii State Govt that would say they were part of the Obama birth certificate forgery. Minus that.. there is no there there as they say.
As you say for the “conspircy” people.. I would more buy into dirty tricks of getting the brillant people in Conservative blogs to waste all their time on something that isn’t there then I would buy into the fact that Obama isn’t eligible.